Grognard view of One D&D?

haakon1

Adventurer
I'm not sure if I'm a grognard, though my user name is pretty close!

I started my D&D experience with 3.5. I loved it, problems and all. I eventually switched to 1E Pathfinder, which is now my preferred set of rules.
For what it’s worth, I think you’re a Grognard. Neither criticism nor congratulation, just observation of: stuck with an Older Edition.

I have only played PF1 at Paizocon (from the first in Redmond to the last pre-pandemic in Seattle) and on Xbox in Pathfinder: Kingmaker. But I read and use PF1 ideas and adventures in my 3.5e campaigns.

I always wonder “what’s up with PF2”, but honestly, I haven’t checked it out at all. I don’t even buy PF2 stuff, because I’m not sure if it works with 3.5e/PF1 or not. Which makes me a bit sad/amused - to be out of current with both WotC and Paizo.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

payn

Legend
For what it’s worth, I think you’re a Grognard. Neither criticism nor congratulation, just observation of: stuck with an Older Edition.

I have only played PF1 at Paizocon (from the first in Redmond to the last pre-pandemic in Seattle) and on Xbox in Pathfinder: Kingmaker. But I read and use PF1 ideas and adventures in my 3.5e campaigns.

I always wonder “what’s up with PF2”, but honestly, I haven’t checked it out at all. I don’t even buy PF2 stuff, because I’m not sure if it works with 3.5e/PF1 or not. Which makes me a bit sad/amused - to be out of current with both WotC and Paizo.
As a big PF1 guy, I can say the PF2 is an entirely different animal. Not likely compatible on most levels.
 

Whizbang Dustyboots

100% that gnome
This is the best time in history to be a D&D gamer, of any edition. More 1E material is released every year than TSR did in their entire run, to say nothing of OD&D, BD&D and more.

If you aren't a fan of 5E or whatever version, great! You have so many choices, some of them super-finely differentiated from other products reprinting previous editions of rules. As far as I can tell, everything outside of 2E Players Option rules are out there somewhere, and in that case, you just have to settle for the original rules (not cleaned up and better organized copies), which are also now widely available.

Honestly, whatever version of D&D you enjoy, I have a hard time seeing any reason for complaint.
 


For what it’s worth, I think you’re a Grognard. Neither criticism nor congratulation, just observation of: stuck with an Older Edition.

I have only played PF1 at Paizocon (from the first in Redmond to the last pre-pandemic in Seattle) and on Xbox in Pathfinder: Kingmaker. But I read and use PF1 ideas and adventures in my 3.5e campaigns.

I always wonder “what’s up with PF2”, but honestly, I haven’t checked it out at all. I don’t even buy PF2 stuff, because I’m not sure if it works with 3.5e/PF1 or not. Which makes me a bit sad/amused - to be out of current with both WotC and Paizo.
And I take 3.5 ideas and use them for my PF1 campaigns! Are we an ouroboros yet? :)

Now if you excuse me, there are young whipper snappers on my lawn that I need to chase off. Dang kids and their advantage, and short rests, and ... and um ... what was I talking about?
 

Volund

Explorer
I guess I'm a grognard. Started with Holmes Basic in 1979 and was playing wargames before that. The Tower of Zenopus and B1 were the first modules I ran. I have enjoyed playing and running 5e, but my reaction to 1D&D is that I don't really care. Nobody in my 5e group is talking about it either. I'm curious to see the new core books, like I was when 2e came out, but I don't know that I'll buy them. I remember seeing 2e in the bookstore, skimming through them, and deciding there wasn't anything there I needed.

The main reason I don't care is that I just don't like the kind of adventures WotC publishes, so I don't need new rules to play them. There are enough players who like playing D&D as a dungeon delving, treasure finding game, more every year, and I have enough 5e, 1e, B/X, and OSE content to last the rest of my life. The last thread of hope connecting me to the new edition was that there would be an updated Greyhawk setting in 2024 for the 50th anniversary, but that doesn't seem to be happening.
 

Whizbang Dustyboots

100% that gnome
The last thread of hope connecting me to the new edition was that there would be an updated Greyhawk setting in 2024 for the 50th anniversary, but that doesn't seem to be happening.
We know nothing about what's happening in 2024, other than them issuing a new PHB, MM and DMG. For all we know, they'll be releasing a new setting every week. (JAKANDOR LIVES!)

I think we're almost defintely going to get either a big Forgotten Realms setting book or a Greyhawk one.
 

CleverNickName

Limit Break Dancing
Just a few months ago, I ran a Roll20 game of D&D for some of my high-school buddies back home, using the B/X rules. (I was the only person at the virtual table who was familiar with more than one edition of the rules, so I decided to just use the same rules that we played with in High School.) It was just as easy to set up and run as any other RPG on that platform...the hardest part was converting the map from PDF to JPG format so that I could import it. In other words, not really all that hard.

It was a lot of fun crawling around through Castle Amber and reliving some old memories. More fun--and less work--than the Internet had led me to believe, anyway. Thanks, Internet!

So my advice to all of my fellow Grognards:

KeepCalm.png
 
Last edited:

MGibster

Legend
I suspect WotC has absolutely no interest in Older Edition fans, so I don’t suspect it’ll bring us back into the fold (whichever Older Editions we prefer), but whatever One D&D is, I’ll buy the PHB and presumably play it occasionally with someone else DMing … and learn to convert some of the avalanche of new material backwards.
I'm cool with that. People in their twenties were raised on Dragon Ball, Pokemon, World of Warcraft, and other properties that didn't exist when I was a kid and they have different expectations than I had. For D&D to remain relevant, WotC needs to cater to the changing desires of their audience. What worked for me in 1992 might not work for as many gamers in 2022. (And honestly, what worked for me in 1992 might not work for me today.)
 

Cruentus

Adventurer
I'm cool with that. People in their twenties were raised on Dragon Ball, Pokemon, World of Warcraft, and other properties that didn't exist when I was a kid and they have different expectations than I had. For D&D to remain relevant, WotC needs to cater to the changing desires of their audience. What worked for me in 1992 might not work for as many gamers in 2022. (And honestly, what worked for me in 1992 might not work for me today.)
As a grognard, it takes me a very long time to realize that things aren't aimed at me anymore (games, TV, music, movies, technology, even DnD). Once I finally realize I'm not the target audience, everything makes sense and then I can settle into what I want to do/enjoy doing, rather than fighting against it. And its the same with DnD. I started back in Basic into Ad&d, played 2nd, life got in the way of 3rd, 4th didn't stick, and I picked up 5th with my old gaming group (the one from Ad&d) as Covid got rolling. So it was a long stretch of time between times I had actually played. Played 5e a lot for a couple of years, liked it okay, but then didn't. Started looking backward, testing things, and found my happy place back in Basic/OSE, and that's where I'm going to stay. I have limited time/energy to play games, so I might as well do what I enjoy, and let those who enjoy 5e do their thing.
 

nevin

Hero
Oh I understand and am guilty of it. With some things, like my phone, I usually am one or two iterations behind. I am happy to let others discover and help workout the bugs and I will wait until the improvements will be meaningful to me.

But for hobby things, like VTTs, I like to play around with the newest versions, features, and cool-looking community mods that I don't need and may never use.

I guess I am kinda like that with my D&D. I buy all the new rules and monsters books so that I have them in D&D Beyond. I generally do not buy adventure modules from WotC anymore but I will often buy just the character classes, backgrounds, monsters, and magic items -- again, just to have them in D&D Beyond.
I think a lot of experienced DM's do that. I don't like to run modules or encounters because my players will read them and them plan for the encounters. If I make my own encounters then i can plan for my party .
 


Lanefan

Victoria Rules
Really? I’d consider that cheating, and ruining the point of playing.
Agreed; but if one is running a bunch of experienced old-school DMs as one's players it's inevitable that any classic module will almost certainly have been either played through or run by at least one of them and sometimes by all of them.

I'm a good example: there's a bunch of classic modules I'd never want to play in now as I just remember them too well through having DMed them.
 

MNblockhead

A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
Really? I’d consider that cheating, and ruining the point of playing.
Depends on the group(s) you play with. In my experience it usually isn't that the players agree to play in a campaign, then run out and buy a book they don't have so they can read it to "win."

More likely, many players are also DMs or just fans and buy the books, read them because they enjoy them and some time later their group decides to run an adventure they have already read. Or you may have some very active players that played some or all of an adventure with another group or adventurer's league, but they still want to participate in your game.

Many players are mature enough to not metagame. I'm fine if a player tells me "I read that adventure but I never got to run it. I would love to play in this campaign. I'll avoid metagaming and will let players who haven't run the game make decisions where my pre-existing knowlege of the adventure might be a spoiler." As a DM I would likely make some changes anyway to mix things up.

Currently, I typically run third-party adventures because I don't have the time to homebrew entire campaigns and the third-party adventures better match the style of game I want to run than the WotC games. They also have the benefit of not being familiar to my players.
 

NO edition of D&D has an expiration date. Doesn't matter why they might want old Grognards to drink the koolaid - they just don't have to buy into 5E if they don't want to. Nobody does. Everyone can play any past edition to their hearts content until they die. The problem the old guard might face is finding people to play. 5E is the 800# gorilla and just doesn't need to care about grognards (old schoolers, or whatever you want to call them). The NON-5E numbers of players are simply insignificant to their success.

I have enjoyed playing 5E, but I have no desire to RUN it as a DM. If players WANT me to run a game then they're certainly gonna be playing 3E E6 or house-ruled 1E. I'd been thinking I might stoop to running a 5E Spelljammer game, but that's feeling less likely as time goes by. Part of the problem IS that the people I want to play with aren't all in the same area. The idea of a truly 3D VTT to run games on DOES have appeal to me. WHEN I SEE IT, I will then assess if it's worth actually trying. Until then it's all just everybody's WILD, largely baseless speculation. They're also making rules changes. I have no idea what effect those would have on 5E gameplay as it currently stands. Frankly, I don't much care because I'm STILL more interested in running older editions and NOT in running 5E. But if someone else invites me to play in a 5E game, or OneD&D game - I'll bite. My enjoyment of such a game would not then hinge upon the system but upon the game as presented BY THAT DM. That was always the case and always will be. A good DM can run an enjoyable game of even not-very-good rules, but if the DM just has little or no interest in the underlying rules then the game they present will greatly suffer accordingly. The rules matter a lot more for me as DM than they do for me as a player.

Frankly, the best outcome for me at this point is a new OneD&D VTT that I can use for OTHER editions as well and not have to commit to running ONLY OneD&D with it. I don't see that as terribly likely. Again - they don't have a REASON to care about older editions or those who might prefer them. And in terms of programming a VTT, they're taking on a HELL of a lot bigger task to adapt it all to multiple rules editions and/or house rules than to cater only to the rules they WANT to cater to. Herding everyone to ONE set of rules is better for them for sales. They've been doing it since they bought TSR in the first place. They tried a VTT once before back in the beginning in the 3E era and it failed quite hard. I'm not convinced yet that THIS attempt will actually succeed to the degree they want people to believe it will.

I will wait and see, and hold my final judgements until then.
 

Thomas Shey

Legend
NO edition of D&D has an expiration date. Doesn't matter why they might want old Grognards to drink the koolaid - they just don't have to buy into 5E if they don't want to. Nobody does. Everyone can play any past edition to their hearts content until they die. The problem the old guard might face is finding people to play. 5E is the 800# gorilla and just doesn't need to care about grognards (old schoolers, or whatever you want to call them). The NON-5E numbers of players are simply insignificant to their success.

This is really the issue with non-D&D games, too; if you don't have an established group you're going to move over to a new game (and know are not allergic to the whole idea) you just have to accept that you're fishing people out of the vast mass of D&D players, current and past. Its just the gig.
 

Whizbang Dustyboots

100% that gnome
Many players are mature enough to not metagame. I'm fine if a player tells me "I read that adventure but I never got to run it. I would love to play in this campaign. I'll avoid metagaming and will let players who haven't run the game make decisions where my pre-existing knowlege of the adventure might be a spoiler." As a DM I would likely make some changes anyway to mix things up.
I run my main campaign in Ptolus, a setting packed with major secrets, including earth-shattering ones about the nature of the world. Several of my players own the book and run games in it as well, and thus almost certainly know all the secrets I'm making relevant in the campaign. There has never been an issue in more than a decade of play.

However, I also knew everyone for more than a decade beforehand and we'd done collaborative works together, so I knew they'd be fine. If a random person wanted to join the campaign, I would ask them not to buy the book or read spoilers about it until I had a better sense of whether they would be able to not let their outside knowledge influence play.

Honestly, I don't think I've had an issue with players cheating this way -- and I do think of it as cheating -- since middle school, which is a bad standard to hold any adult to. I hope everyone has grown since middle school.
 
Last edited:




An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top